BATTLE OF THE GRADO 1000s - COMPARING THE GRADO PS1000, HP1000 (HP1), AND GS1000e
Introduction:
About a year ago, I developed a set of 10 features, associated them with 4 recordings, and used them in comparative listening tests of 3 headphones at a time. I performed 10 such 3-way compares, each with its own post detailing the work, and summarized in the table here:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/723136/battle-of-the-bassys-beats-pro-yamaha-pro-500-and-beats-studio-2013-compared#post_10634722
Since then, I have acquired 13 Grado headphones, so I thought I would apply that same comparison method to the top three (all with "1000" in their model number) and post my results here.
Test Method:
I used four songs, all encoded in Apple Lossless Format at CD quality (I actually bought the CDs and ripped them... no internet download involved) and played by my Apple iPod Touch 5th Gen (this particular Apple player has an unusually low output impedance and unusually high quality for a portable system):
- "You're Going To Miss Me When I'm Gone," by Band of Heathens, from their album One Foot In The Ether (used for fidelity of drum sound, positional resolution of two vocalists, and ability to discern pitch of string bass passages);
- "Spanish Harlem," by Rebecca Pidgeon, on The Ultimate Demonstration Disc of Chesky records (used to assess female vocals, transparency, the attack of finger on bass string, and high resolution discrimination of differences in shaker shakes);
- "Symphony No. 3 in C Minor Op. 78 (Organ Symphony) - IV" by Camille Saint Saens played by Charles Munch and the Boston Symphony (used to assess the "ripping" sound of well-rendered lower brass and organ reed pipes, and the ability to hear a very small entrance amidst a bombastic chord of orchestra and organ at full tilt);
- "Throwback" by B.o.B. on Underground Luxury (used to assess ability of a bass tone, specifically lowest C on piano at about 32 Hz, to pick me up by the throat and shake me!)
The 10 tests were as follows:
- Transparency: What is between me and the music? A felt cloth? A "Sennheiser veil?" A frosted window? Dirty window? Clear Saran wrap? or nothing? At its best, makes me forget I am listening on headphones and am in room with musicians.
- Width of sound stage: How far to the left and to the right, (yes, AND up and down in best cases) does it seem the musical sources are arranged?
- Positional resolution: Can I distinguish a difference in position of two singers in Song 1?
- Bass visceral: Does the bass in third verse of Song 4 actually shake me? Or do I just hear it?
- Drum "twang": At start of Song 1, do the bass and tom tom drumhead have a tone and a pitch, rather than just a thump?
- Bass pitch perception: For the complicated bass runs in Song 1, do I hear a pitch with sufficient accuracy to sing or transcribe the part?
- Bass finger pluck: Do I hear the actual impact of fingers on the bass string just before hearing its sound on Song 2?
- Shaker variation: In Song 2, verse 3, do the various shaker shakes sound a bit different from each other, as they should?
- "Ripping" of organ / brass: In Song 3, is there the sensation of hearing each vibration of the French horn and low organ reed tones (sort of the tonal counterpart to hearing a "pitch" from a drumhead in Test 5);
- Discern added chord: About 1:38 into Song 3, after the full orchestra and organ hold a chord at the top of a passage, can I hear a small number of orchestra instruments join in, as sort of an echo, in the second measure of that chord?
These tests generally emphasize what I find most pleasing in a headphone, namely high-frequency-related features including transparency, upper harmonics of sounds from drum-head, brass, organ pipe, and string bass, and high-resolution effects such as fine detail of each shaker sound and the finger on the bass string. Only one test (#4) appeals to my emerging "bass-head" nature -- hence bass response is under-represented in these tests.
For each of the 10 tests, I ranked each headphone against the other two, operating two at a time and repeating comparisons on each test and each pair until I could either rank order the three headphones as first place, second place, or third place, or determined that I could not rank two (a tie) or sometimes, all three (a three-way tie). I assigned 3 points for first place, 2 points for second place, and 1 point for third place. If two headphones tied for first place, I awarded each 2.5 points and gave the lowest-performing headphone 1 point, and if two headphones timed for second place, I award the top scorer 3 points and the two ties 1.5 points each, thereby preserving the fact that each total across headphones was kept at 6 points (1 + 2 + 3 = 2.5 + 2.5 + 1 = 1.5 + 1.5 + 3 = 6). Likewise, if all tied, I awarded all 2 points (3 x 2 = 6).
In the comparison chart that is below, I also color-coded each headphone for each test by blue ("first prize" = 3 points), red (second prize = 2 points), or yellow (3rd prize = 1 point). Ties for first place are shown as light purple (red + blue, 2.5 points); ties for second place are orange (red + yellow, 1.5 points).
Headphones Tested:
I tested the Grado Labs PS1000 (non-e), Joseph Grado Signature Products HP1000 (HP1 - with polarity switches), and the Grado Labs GS1000e. In all cases, I used the Joseph Grado Signature Products HPA-1 headphone amplifier and lossless CD-quality music.
More pictorially, here are the headphones and amp:
Grado Labs PS1000 headphone and Joseph Grado Signature Products HPA-1 amp.
Joseph Grado Signature Products HP1000 (HP1) with polarity switch in center of each earpiece.
Grado GS1000e headphones (with Grado box and Grado RA1 amp, not used)
Results:
The PS1000 distinguished itself with a spacious sound stage, deepest bass, and superb treble detail. Cymbal strikes came forth as beautifully "tizzy," deep kick drum blows had enough higher harmonics to give a tone rather than a thud to the drum head, and the harmonics of subbass were preserved.
The HP1000, a 1990s-vintage headphone and the first headphone of the Grado family, moved the musicians much closer to the listener, achieving an intimate arrangement. This is likely due to the on-ear flat pads that were designed into the HP1000, as opposed to the over-ear "G Cush" pads of the other two headphones. It was not as transparent as the PS1000 (or other current Grado headphones), but it provided excellent treble detail.
The GS1000e, when compared back and forth with the other two headphones, was distinguished by a bass that was almost "tubby" sounding (though not enough for me to have ever noticed it before these side-by-side comparisons). Low notes did not have as much higher harmonic content as with the other two headphones, and the kick drum had a bit more of a "thud." Sound stage size was between that of the PS1000 and the HP1000, but it was two dimensional, while the PS1000 sound stage gave a feeling of an additional dimension of depth in addition to left and right.
(click on table to render it legible!)
It is most illuminating to look at each feature to compare the three headphones; however it is most tempting to add up all the scores to see which headphone came out "the best."
Differences of fewer than three points are insignificant. With the PS1000 scoring 25.5, I clearly preferred it in these tests to the HP1000 and the GS1000, which were close to each other at 18 and 16.5, respectively. The preference for the PS1000 is quickly apparent from the number of blue (first prize) cells in its column.
I was surprised that my preference for the PS1000 was so strong. Perhaps the fact that it has cups that are metal exterior sintered to wood interior, which Grado says is done to reduce undesired resonances, makes it preferable over the all-metal HP1000 or the all-wood GS1000e. Also, the GS1000e is only 2 months old and likely has less than 25 hours of use - early reviews noted that the GS1000e improved greatly after 30 hours of use.
The HP1000 was very good, but the soundstage and greater transparency of the PS1000 caused it to win in many comparisons with the HP1000. Measurements show that the HP1000 actually has the flattest spectral response... I have superposed the plot of HP1000 reported by purr1n on top of plots for the PS1000 and GS1000 produced by headphone.com.
Spectral response of HP1000 (black) is flatter than that of PS1000 (blue) or GS1000 (red).
Had I chosen a different mix of 10 tests, for example put in more tests of bass power at the expense of several treble-related tests, the totals would change. If soundstage is important to you, it should contribute more than one out of 10 criteria. So each total is just an equal weighting of the particular features that I chose as important to me, and have no significance beyond that.
In a related post a few months ago (
here) I compared the PS1000, the Grado RS1i, and the Sennheiser HD 800 using the same set of tests. Total scores were essentially tied - a look at the table in the linked post will describe the ranking of the three on these 10 features.
I think that it is the larger sound stage of the PS1000, much as a result of its over-ear pads, and the greater transparency, "you-are-there" feel of the PS1000 for which Grados are known, as well as the better subbass, that put it ahead of the wonderful HP1000s in my particular rankings. It is immediately clear to me (
@stacker45 if you have PS1000s to compare, see if you agree) that the PS1000 has a clear, unmuffled transparency that the HP1000 does not... I think that the HP1000 predated the Grado signature of that ultra transparent signature(i.e. no cloth in the way, no corners around which music plays... you are THERE).
It is not surprising that, as good as the HP1000 is, Grado has continued to improve, and its current flagship might do some things that the original one did not. That's fine by me. I treasure my HP1000s!
And the GS1000e was pushed down because of that "tubbiness" to its bass. I suspect, since at least
this reviewer excoriates his GS1000e sound when it was under 30 hours, that the fact that mine probably has less than 20 hours of use might mean that tubbiness will tighten up! I will try again after many more hours.
But like your kids, good and bad, slim and fat, smart and , er, "challenged," I love ALL my Grados as family members!
